f



SATA on 5.0.6 or 5.0.7?

Anyone running SCO 5.0.6 or 5.0.7 on servers with
SATA drives? 

I'd like to hear from anyone with SATA based servers and if
they met their exceptions for performance and reliability.

In the past, I have always used SCSI drives for the performance
and customary 5 year warrantee.  Now SATA drives are available with
5 year warrantee and manufactures claim the drives are equivalent 
to SCSI performance at 40% less cost. 

I have checked my distributors and all the SATA drives I can find
are 7200 RPM with the exception of the 36G WD360GD 10k RPM SATA
drive. 

I have a request from a client running SCO 3.2v4.2 on 66 MHz 486
with 4G disk to upgrade to current hardware and OS. 

SCSI is overkill for this client and the 36G WD looks like a
good choice. I'll eliminate all SCSI by using Backup Edge 
writing to a ATAPI DVD-RAM and upgrade the client to
5.0.6 or 5.0.7 (SCO's web site suggests it has upgrades to
Enterprise 6.0 from Xenix/UNIX but there is no part number
listed and inquiries come up: Not Available).


--

                                      Steve Fabac
                                       S.M. Fabac & Associates
                                        816/765-1670
0
smfabac (422)
9/12/2005 5:02:01 PM
comp.unix.sco.misc 3925 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

2 Replies
1255 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 10

I have switched over most of my small server installs over to SATA raid 
using the intel SRCS16 raid controller and the 10K 36 gig raptor drives.  So 
far other then one of the cables breaking off the connector during shipping, 
I have not had any probelms.  On the smaller system running around 25 users, 
I can not say that I can notice any speed differences between SCSI and SATA. 
I am sure on the bigger customers there would be a difference, but for the 
price difference SATA works extremely well for us.  This is on 5.06 and 
5.07, I have not tried it out on 6.0 yet.


"Steve M. Fabac, Jr." <smfabac@att.net> wrote in message 
news:4325B488.908204F5@att.net...
> Anyone running SCO 5.0.6 or 5.0.7 on servers with
> SATA drives?
>
> I'd like to hear from anyone with SATA based servers and if
> they met their exceptions for performance and reliability.
>
> In the past, I have always used SCSI drives for the performance
> and customary 5 year warrantee.  Now SATA drives are available with
> 5 year warrantee and manufactures claim the drives are equivalent
> to SCSI performance at 40% less cost.
>
> I have checked my distributors and all the SATA drives I can find
> are 7200 RPM with the exception of the 36G WD360GD 10k RPM SATA
> drive.
>
> I have a request from a client running SCO 3.2v4.2 on 66 MHz 486
> with 4G disk to upgrade to current hardware and OS.
>
> SCSI is overkill for this client and the 36G WD looks like a
> good choice. I'll eliminate all SCSI by using Backup Edge
> writing to a ATAPI DVD-RAM and upgrade the client to
> 5.0.6 or 5.0.7 (SCO's web site suggests it has upgrades to
> Enterprise 6.0 from Xenix/UNIX but there is no part number
> listed and inquiries come up: Not Available).
>
>
> --
>
>                                      Steve Fabac
>                                       S.M. Fabac & Associates
>                                        816/765-1670 


0
9/12/2005 5:55:04 PM
"Steve M. Fabac, Jr." <smfabac@att.net> wrote in message
news:4325B488.908204F5@att.net...
> Anyone running SCO 5.0.6 or 5.0.7 on servers with
> SATA drives?
>
> I'd like to hear from anyone with SATA based servers and if
> they met their exceptions for performance and reliability.
>
> In the past, I have always used SCSI drives for the performance
> and customary 5 year warrantee.  Now SATA drives are available with
> 5 year warrantee and manufactures claim the drives are equivalent
> to SCSI performance at 40% less cost.
>
> I have checked my distributors and all the SATA drives I can find
> are 7200 RPM with the exception of the 36G WD360GD 10k RPM SATA
> drive.
>
> I have a request from a client running SCO 3.2v4.2 on 66 MHz 486
> with 4G disk to upgrade to current hardware and OS.
>
> SCSI is overkill for this client and the 36G WD looks like a
> good choice. I'll eliminate all SCSI by using Backup Edge
> writing to a ATAPI DVD-RAM and upgrade the client to
> 5.0.6 or 5.0.7 (SCO's web site suggests it has upgrades to
> Enterprise 6.0 from Xenix/UNIX but there is no part number
> listed and inquiries come up: Not Available).

Have you considered the possibility that the WD Raptor 36GB drive
that you're considering may be overkill for a client migrating from
a 486/66, 4GB system? Plus, these older 36GB drives are much
noisier and run hotter than the more current 7200 RPM drives.

A WD 7200 RPM SATA or PATA drive, 80GB (8MB cache) would
be more than adequate for any application solution they must
now be using, at 1/3 the cost of the 10K RPM drive. (Unless
they're jumping from 5 users to 50.) The 7200 drives only have
a 3-yr warranty, but it appears your client already treats his
13+ yr old system very well.

Bob


0
72027.3605 (442)
9/13/2005 4:46:42 AM
Reply: